memo for motion against summary judgment :: essays research papers

I.Introduction and Standard for Opposition to compendium JudgmentCrowell Academy, Inc. and Arturo Gomez, (hereinafter, collectively Crowell) were grossly hit-and-run(prenominal) and used willful misconduct in their responsibilities involving the fencing club. The dicker power of Crowell was so grossly unequal so as to endow Lajuana Barnett at the mercy of Crowells negligence. Lastly, the exculpatory clause contained in the forgo form (see release form) is void as against public policy. Consequently, downstairs doc law, it is up to the trier of fact to determine if the exculpatory clause is unenforceable. As such, in that location is a dispute as to the genuine issue of satisfying fact related to Crowells Answer, Crowell can be liable to Lajauna Barnett for negligence, and Crowell is not entitled to Summary Judgment as a look of law. Summary Judgment should be granted only upon a showing that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact. relief pitchers Fund Ins. Co. v. Rairigh, 59 Md. App. 305, 313, cert. denied, 301 Md. 176 (1984). If there is a conflict surrounded by the inferences which may be drawn from the evidence before the court, summary ideal is not proper. Boucher v. Riner, 68 Md. App. 539, 543 (1986) (quoting Coffey v. Derby Steel Co., 291 Md. 241, 246-247 (1981)). Unless the facts ar so clean-cut as to permit a conclusion as a matter of law, it is for the trier of fact to determine whether a defendants negligent conduct amounts to gross negligence. Jacob v. Davis, 128 Md.App. 433, 465 (1999) (quoting Artis v. Cyphers, 100 Md.App. 633, 652 (1994)). Generally, exculpatory agreements otherwise valid are not construed to cover the more extreme forms of negligence-wilful, wanton, reckless, or gross. Winterstein v. Wilcom, 16 Md.App. 130, 136 (1972).II. tilt of Undisputed Material Facts1.Defendant Arturo Gomez is the fencing coach at Crowell and at all times relevant to this matter acted as Crowells servant. 2.Crowell provides weapons a nd electronic scoring devices for club members club members provide their own protective equipment, including mask, glove, jacket, and plastron.3.In the fencing Club meeting prior to October 16, 2001, Gomez instructed team members in footwork preparatory to allowing them to handle weapons4.In the October 16, 2001 club meeting, Gomez instructed club members to don their protective equipment for their initial experience with using their weapons.5. complainants nerve was severed under her left arm when an epee sliced through plaintiffs jacket. 6.Plaintiff had put the plastron on her right arm.